Time to Prep for Next Year

[Dane96]

Well, in short, if we dont have that game put away by the start of the second half...then yes, I think preppeing for a brutal schedule with thirteen new players IS PARAMOUNT.

 

See the reasons espoused by Danefan and Ruler.

[danefan]

BTW - I LOVE ALBANY FOOTBALL DISCUSSION IN NOVEMBER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

*even if it does have some negative tinges to it. More people interested in the program cannot be a bad thing. Even if our opinions clash.

[Ruler 79]

I will say it again. Younger/better up and coming players should get playing time in the last game. That is my position. If they were clinching a 3rd NEC title they should be getting some playing time. #10 has replaced #7 on several series throughout the year. Should McCarty be replaced? Hell no. Should a younger TB get some playing time? Yes. Same goes for #7 and every other position where a Sr is struggling. I would be rotating offensive lineman like they were T-shirts.

 

I agree with you that a 6-2 record is better then 5-3. The problem is they should be no worse then 7-1. Forget the NEC title, it would take a miracle and then we basically got a consolation prize. As fans we get spoiled by success. 7-4 or 6-5 is not considered a great season here. If we wre Wagner, St. Francis or Sacred Heart we could have reason for a ticker tape parde.

[43hike52]

I want to step in and concur with both Danefan and Ruler (and bosydid...but you are not the target of the ire here).

 

What everyone is missing is the following facts:

 

1. Most of us thought the line would be an issue-- look at my AGS and BPF threads on the subject in pre-season and through the year. this has come to fruition and NO DOUBT has hurt the QB play. Teams have stacked the box and basically rushed the $iena out of our QB daring him to make throws...some that would be very difficult.

 

2. Some of the issues have nothing to do with limitations of Fordie's system (if you think it is tight now...I can only begin to tell you what it was like in the early 90's...and I am sure it was even tighter when Ruler was playing).

 

3. No one advocated a complete benching of anyone; We simply feel that at some pt at Wagner...the youngins need to get tested. A ton is riding on next year...and even moreso if we dont get our stadium. The only reason we have GREAT GREAT KIDS LIKE VINNY ESPOSITO IS BECAUSE OF BOB FORD. Without Coach...and with no stadium...we likely will be a tought place to recruit to next to our peers. So...a playoff spot next year is paramount...and that starts with closing out Wagner and getting some kids game time.

 

People need to take a breath and see the big picture.

 

Ford only recruits great kids (its the one thing I truly love about our school's athletics program as this seemingly goes across the board) and I am sure the 17 Seniors are great people and will be HIGHLY SUCCESSFUL IN LIFE.

 

This sure doesn't sound like the same Dane96 that started this thread.... here are quotes from your earlier posts:

**** I respect what the seniors have done, but it is time to move forward with the program and play our future in the final game. They need the experience NOW!

**** They need to play whomever isn't red-shirting and give them minutes. It is time.... and that's that.

**** It is time for the younger kids to get their PT and set a tone for Spring practice

**** A. Smith or D. DiLella should be getting a half

**** Next year is so important to the program. All the focus should be on that from now on.

 

So, tell me. What is paramount? Closing out Wagner or getting some kids game time, to better prepare them for next year, the first autobid year into the playoffs? And for the sake of argument, you can't have both, i.e. the outcome of the Wagner game remains in question from beginning to end. I really am curious as to your answer.

 

If you are going to quote someone, someone dont part and parcel it without context. WHEN did I advocate...other than stating they should get time for a half...did I say benching anyone in toto? At worse, I was off for a quarter.

 

So dont put words in my mouth. And yes, this is the same Dane96 that posted the original statement because the sentiment and message have not changed; you are merely parsing words.

 

 

Frankly speaking, if we cant beat Wagner in the first half and the first part of the 3rd qtr...we have MAJOR ISSUES and at that point, it doesnt matter who is in.

 

What are you talking about? I did no more or less than quote what you wrote in earlier posts. I meant to put no words in your mouth... but if I did, show me. You, Ruler and others seem to think that giving these "youngsters" one half or more of one game playing experience is somehow going to propel next years team to heights that they would not otherwise achieve. There are no guarantees. I just don't understand it. Teams in the FCS that are playoff teams reload year after year and many of them do it without skipping a beat. To compromise a win after the kind of run that Albany has had, just makes no sense to me. You guys are willing to exchange a tangible victory, a 6 and 2 conference record, a possible NEC co-title, for what? The promise that these kids will be markedly better for having game experience against Wagner? Please.... good programs, like Albany, find another way to get it done. They work hard in the off season, the winter, spring ball and fall camp. Unless your rebuilding and not reloading, you put the players on the field that deserve to be on the field, based on their ability and attitude, not based on whether they are a senior or underclassmen or what you hope to accomplish next year.

[danefan]

 

What are you talking about? I did no more or less than quote what you wrote in earlier posts. I meant to put no words in your mouth... but if I did, show me. You, Ruler and others seem to think that giving these "youngsters" one half or more of one game playing experience is somehow going to propel next years team to heights that they would not otherwise achieve. There are no guarantees. I just don't understand it. Teams in the FCS that are playoff teams reload year after year and many of them do it without skipping a beat. To compromise a win after the kind of run that Albany has had, just makes no sense to me. You guys are willing to exchange a tangible victory, a 6 and 2 conference record, a possible NEC co-title, for what? The promise that these kids will be markedly better for having game experience against Wagner? Please.... good programs, like Albany, find another way to get it done. They work hard in the off season, the winter, spring ball and fall camp. Unless your rebuilding and not reloading, you put the players on the field that deserve to be on the field, based on their ability and attitude, not based on whether they are a senior or underclassmen or what you hope to accomplish next year.

 

I have no problem saying that we'll be rebuilding.

 

Losing what we do at core positions is getting very very close to rebuilding.

 

Replacing 8 muti-year starters on defense is rebuilding to me.

 

Replacing a QB with someone who has ZERO game time is rebuilding the QB position to me as well.

 

I think you make a valid point and I think it presents the line which perhaps myself, Dane96 and Ruler are on the other side of.

 

Those guys can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think we all see getting playing time for the young guys as a potential way to avoid the pain associated with rebuilding.

[Ruler 79]

43hike52 you make some valid points about reloading. What you point out is true for a linebacker or defensive end or even an offensive lineman. QB, as Danefan can attest to, is a whole other animal. For the most part Albany reloads. The problem is they are graduating 17 players of which most of them are impact players. So while we are reloading/rebuilding with new athletes we will be very young, especially @ QB. Nothing but real game conditions gives kids the experience needed, ESPECIALLY at QB. So yes playing these kids for a qtr or a half will better prepare them for next season. If the athletes are as good as we think then beating Wagner will take care of itself.

 

Let me bore you for a minute to prove a point. Our starting Center went down the last week of the season the week before the ECAC Championship against(believe it or not) Wagner. We beat Wagner 15-0 and was set to face Joe Dudek(was in the running for the Heisman Trophy...Bo Jackson won it of course) and Plymouth State. In steps a wide eyed Freshman from Shenedahowah High school

named Chris Pagan. He started off slow and sloppy but by games end he was a seasoned vet. The following season he stepped in as the starter and didn't miss a beat. He had a good career at UA and won a championship.

[43hike52]

 

What are you talking about? I did no more or less than quote what you wrote in earlier posts. I meant to put no words in your mouth... but if I did, show me. You, Ruler and others seem to think that giving these "youngsters" one half or more of one game playing experience is somehow going to propel next years team to heights that they would not otherwise achieve. There are no guarantees. I just don't understand it. Teams in the FCS that are playoff teams reload year after year and many of them do it without skipping a beat. To compromise a win after the kind of run that Albany has had, just makes no sense to me. You guys are willing to exchange a tangible victory, a 6 and 2 conference record, a possible NEC co-title, for what? The promise that these kids will be markedly better for having game experience against Wagner? Please.... good programs, like Albany, find another way to get it done. They work hard in the off season, the winter, spring ball and fall camp. Unless your rebuilding and not reloading, you put the players on the field that deserve to be on the field, based on their ability and attitude, not based on whether they are a senior or underclassmen or what you hope to accomplish next year.

 

I have no problem saying that we'll be rebuilding.

 

Losing what we do at core positions is getting very very close to rebuilding.

 

Replacing 8 muti-year starters on defense is rebuilding to me.

 

Replacing a QB with someone who has ZERO game time is rebuilding the QB position to me as well.

 

I think you make a valid point and I think it presents the line which perhaps myself, Dane96 and Ruler are on the other side of.

 

Those guys can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think we all see getting playing time for the young guys as a potential way to avoid the pain associated with rebuilding.

Are you saying that by playing the young guys one half or more of one game against Wagner is going to turn the description of next years team from one of rebuilding to one of reloading? I don't think so........

[danefan]

What are you talking about? I did no more or less than quote what you wrote in earlier posts. I meant to put no words in your mouth... but if I did, show me. You, Ruler and others seem to think that giving these "youngsters" one half or more of one game playing experience is somehow going to propel next years team to heights that they would not otherwise achieve. There are no guarantees. I just don't understand it. Teams in the FCS that are playoff teams reload year after year and many of them do it without skipping a beat. To compromise a win after the kind of run that Albany has had, just makes no sense to me. You guys are willing to exchange a tangible victory, a 6 and 2 conference record, a possible NEC co-title, for what? The promise that these kids will be markedly better for having game experience against Wagner? Please.... good programs, like Albany, find another way to get it done. They work hard in the off season, the winter, spring ball and fall camp. Unless your rebuilding and not reloading, you put the players on the field that deserve to be on the field, based on their ability and attitude, not based on whether they are a senior or underclassmen or what you hope to accomplish next year.

 

I have no problem saying that we'll be rebuilding.

 

Losing what we do at core positions is getting very very close to rebuilding.

 

Replacing 8 muti-year starters on defense is rebuilding to me.

 

Replacing a QB with someone who has ZERO game time is rebuilding the QB position to me as well.

 

I think you make a valid point and I think it presents the line which perhaps myself, Dane96 and Ruler are on the other side of.

 

Those guys can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think we all see getting playing time for the young guys as a potential way to avoid the pain associated with rebuilding.

Are you saying that by playing the young guys one half or more of one game against Wagner is going to turn the description of next years team from one of rebuilding to one of reloading? I don't think so........

 

I think it may, especially at the QB position. Regular season game speed cannot be replicated in the Spring for a QB.

 

Perhaps this is why our OOC schedule is softer next year? Patriot and Ivy teams instead of CAA. Maybe that was done purposely?

[UAalum72]

 

Perhaps this is why our OOC schedule is softer next year? Patriot and Ivy teams instead of CAA. Maybe that was done purposely?

What have you heard about next year, other than Yale on 10/2?

[danefan]

Perhaps this is why our OOC schedule is softer next year? Patriot and Ivy teams instead of CAA. Maybe that was done purposely?

What have you heard about next year, other than Yale on 10/2?

 

 

Forget it, I'm wrong. I was mixing up the 2011 Colgate game with 2010.

 

We may actually have a return trip to Maine next year. Someone at homecoming mentioned a Columbia series starting next year as well. I wouldn't be surprised about Columbia as Greg Sigler (former TE) and Matt Hamm (former student assistant coach) are coaches at Columbia.

 

So my speculation is now at Maine, at Yale, home versus Columbia.

 

Unless the 2011 game with Colgate got moved to next year because we've bumped them for Cincy in 2011.

[43hike52]

Perhaps this is why our OOC schedule is softer next year? Patriot and Ivy teams instead of CAA. Maybe that was done purposely?

What have you heard about next year, other than Yale on 10/2?

 

 

Forget it, I'm wrong. I was mixing up the 2011 Colgate game with 2010.

 

We may actually have a return trip to Maine next year. Someone at homecoming mentioned a Columbia series starting next year as well. I wouldn't be surprised about Columbia as Greg Sigler (former TE) and Matt Hamm (former student assistant coach) are coaches at Columbia.

 

So my speculation is now at Maine, at Yale, home versus Columbia.

 

Unless the 2011 game with Colgate got moved to next year because we've bumped them for Cincy in 2011.

 

Danefan.... I'm glad you brought up the OOC schedule for 2010. If we assume that Albany opens up with 3 OOC games before NEC play, don't you think that should be adequate playing time for the new QB and others? The team should then be ready to contend for a conference title and the first automatic bid to the FCS playoffs for the NEC. If not, I can't imagine playing half a game against Wagner this year would make any difference. In other words, with one game left on the schedule, the time to prepare for next year is............. NEXT YEAR!

[danefan]

Perhaps this is why our OOC schedule is softer next year? Patriot and Ivy teams instead of CAA. Maybe that was done purposely?

What have you heard about next year, other than Yale on 10/2?

 

 

Forget it, I'm wrong. I was mixing up the 2011 Colgate game with 2010.

 

We may actually have a return trip to Maine next year. Someone at homecoming mentioned a Columbia series starting next year as well. I wouldn't be surprised about Columbia as Greg Sigler (former TE) and Matt Hamm (former student assistant coach) are coaches at Columbia.

 

So my speculation is now at Maine, at Yale, home versus Columbia.

 

Unless the 2011 game with Colgate got moved to next year because we've bumped them for Cincy in 2011.

 

Danefan.... I'm glad you brought up the OOC schedule for 2010. If we assume that Albany opens up with 3 OOC games before NEC play, don't you think that should be adequate playing time for the new QB and others? The team should then be ready to contend for a conference title and the first automatic bid to the FCS playoffs for the NEC. If not, I can't imagine playing half a game against Wagner this year would make any difference. In other words, with one game left on the schedule, the time to prepare for next year is............. NEXT YEAR!

 

But that only works if you play an easy OOC schedule. We've never had that luxury. Maybe we will next year. If we do have an easy schedule next year (e.g. Patriot and Ivy's) then that is a factor I hadn't previously considered. If we open at Maine, I don't think that is the most appropriate place to throw a new QB to the fire (see 2003 Northeastern.... )

[43hike52]

Perhaps this is why our OOC schedule is softer next year? Patriot and Ivy teams instead of CAA. Maybe that was done purposely?

What have you heard about next year, other than Yale on 10/2?

 

 

Forget it, I'm wrong. I was mixing up the 2011 Colgate game with 2010.

 

We may actually have a return trip to Maine next year. Someone at homecoming mentioned a Columbia series starting next year as well. I wouldn't be surprised about Columbia as Greg Sigler (former TE) and Matt Hamm (former student assistant coach) are coaches at Columbia.

 

So my speculation is now at Maine, at Yale, home versus Columbia.

 

Unless the 2011 game with Colgate got moved to next year because we've bumped them for Cincy in 2011.

 

Danefan.... I'm glad you brought up the OOC schedule for 2010. If we assume that Albany opens up with 3 OOC games before NEC play, don't you think that should be adequate playing time for the new QB and others? The team should then be ready to contend for a conference title and the first automatic bid to the FCS playoffs for the NEC. If not, I can't imagine playing half a game against Wagner this year would make any difference. In other words, with one game left on the schedule, the time to prepare for next year is............. NEXT YEAR!

 

But that only works if you play an easy OOC schedule. We've never had that luxury. Maybe we will next year. If we do have an easy schedule next year (e.g. Patriot and Ivy's) then that is a factor I hadn't previously considered. If we open at Maine, I don't think that is the most appropriate place to throw a new QB to the fire (see 2003 Northeastern.... )

Nonsense..... Albany has proven they can compete with anyone in the FCS. Please do not bring that argument to this discussion. You know better than that. And to suggest that a 2010 Albany team would suffer the same humiliating defeat to any CAA team, as the 2003 team did against Northeastern, is just absurd. The program is light years ahead of where it was 6 years ago. But again, you know that better than most.

[danefan]

 

 

Nonsense..... Albany has proven they can compete with anyone in the FCS. Please do not bring that argument to this discussion. You know better than that. And to suggest that a 2010 Albany team would suffer the same humiliating defeat to any CAA team, as the 2003 team did against Northeastern, is just absurd. The program is light years ahead of where it was 6 years ago. But again, you know that better than most.

The teams of 07 and 08 were light years ahead of the 03 team for sure.

 

But we saw a 2009 team suffer a similar butt whooping at UMass. Do you disagree? Remeber that was the old Northeastern (ranked #1 that game)

 

Based on what we need to replace next year on defense and offense what makes you think we'll be able to compete with the CAA teams on the same level as the 07-08 teams?

 

I sure hope we can, but what have we seen to be so sure?

[Dane96]

Perhaps this is why our OOC schedule is softer next year? Patriot and Ivy teams instead of CAA. Maybe that was done purposely?

What have you heard about next year, other than Yale on 10/2?

 

 

Forget it, I'm wrong. I was mixing up the 2011 Colgate game with 2010.

 

We may actually have a return trip to Maine next year. Someone at homecoming mentioned a Columbia series starting next year as well. I wouldn't be surprised about Columbia as Greg Sigler (former TE) and Matt Hamm (former student assistant coach) are coaches at Columbia.

 

So my speculation is now at Maine, at Yale, home versus Columbia.

 

Unless the 2011 game with Colgate got moved to next year because we've bumped them for Cincy in 2011.

 

Danefan.... I'm glad you brought up the OOC schedule for 2010. If we assume that Albany opens up with 3 OOC games before NEC play, don't you think that should be adequate playing time for the new QB and others? The team should then be ready to contend for a conference title and the first automatic bid to the FCS playoffs for the NEC. If not, I can't imagine playing half a game against Wagner this year would make any difference. In other words, with one game left on the schedule, the time to prepare for next year is............. NEXT YEAR!

 

But that only works if you play an easy OOC schedule. We've never had that luxury. Maybe we will next year. If we do have an easy schedule next year (e.g. Patriot and Ivy's) then that is a factor I hadn't previously considered. If we open at Maine, I don't think that is the most appropriate place to throw a new QB to the fire (see 2003 Northeastern.... )

 

I was at that game..and it was ugly for the QB